PHILIPPINE

ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT STATEMENT
SYSTEM (PEISS)
Atty. Normie V. Batula
Natural Resources and Environmental Law
7 July 2017
 OBJECTIVES OF PEISS
To require every project proponent to take
the environment into consideration in the
implementation of its project in order to
provide adequate protection to the
environment or at least minimize the
projects potential negative impacts.
BACKGROUND OF THE PEISS
PD 1151 was passed in 1979 which declared the Governments
recognition of the RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO A HEALTHY
ENVIRONMENT.
Requires all government agencies and private corporation,
firms, entities, to prepare, file and include an Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS) in every action, project or undertaking
which significantly affects the quality of the environment.

PD 1586 was promulgated and established the EIS System,

which provided a systems-oriented and integrated approach to
the filing of the EIS in coordination with the whole
environmental protection program of the State. It provides the
legal basis for EIA

DAO 2003-30 Revised Procedural Manual defines EIA and

procedure (IRR)

The system was eventually called the PEISS

 EO 291
DENR and the EMB are tasked to monitor compliance
with the ECC,
in-charge of the formulation, dissemination and
enforcement of policies on environmental standards
and compliance monitoring.
 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
ASSESSMENT(EIA) PROCESS
process of identifying and predicting the potential
environmental impacts (including bio-physical, socio-
economic and cultural) of proposed actions, policies,
programs and projects and communicating this
information to decision-makers before they make
decisions on the proposed actions.
a proponent-driven process wherein the Proponent
applies for an ECC by submitting an Environmental
Impact Statement.
 DEFINITION OF EIA
involves predicting and evaluating the likely impacts of
a project (including cumulative impacts) on the
environment during construction, commissioning,
operation and abandonment.
includes designing appropriate preventive, mitigating
and enhancement measures addressing these
consequences to protect the environment and the
communitys welfare.
used to enhance planning and guide decision-making.
required to integrate environmental concerns in the
planning process of projects at the feasibility stage.
EIA PROCESS AND THE PROJECT
CYCLE
1. Pre-feasibility
2. Feasibility
3. Detailed Engineering and Design
4. Project Construction and Development
5. Operation and Maintenance
6. Project Conceptualization/Improvement

The process is designed to coincide with the project

cycle at every state beginning from pre-feasibility to
project conceptualization.
ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE
CERTIFICATE
a document issued by the DENR-EMB after a positive review
of an ECC application, certifying that the proponent has
complied with all the requirements of the EIS System and
has committed to implement its approved Environmental
Management Plan.
contains a summary of the information on the type, size and
location of the project, environmental impacts, the
mitigating measures and environmental management plan
for the various government agencies to consider in their
decision-making process.
one of the requirements a Proponent must obtain before it
can begin or continue a project.
Without the ECC, the Proponent would not be able to acquire
the necessary approval from other government agencies and
LGUs, thereby effectively preventing it from proceeding with
its project.
DIFFERENCE OF EIA AND EIS
EIA EIS
A process Document
Only projects covered Filed by s Proponent
by the EIA process are in order to obtain ECC
required to obtain an Based on EIA Process
ECC
 PRE-FEASIBILITY STAGE
most crucial stage in the EIA process
directs Project Proponents to simultaneously conduct
the environmental impact study, required by the ECC
application, and the feasibility study of the proposed
project.
defines its range of actions and considers the project
alternatives
.
TWO FACTORS IN DETERMINING THE
SCOPE OF EIS STATEMENT
1) Nature of the project and its
potential to casuse significant
negative environmental impacts
2) Sensitivity or vulnerability of
environmental resources in the
project area
 SPECIFIC CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING
PROJECTS TO BE COVERED BY THE EIS SYSTEMS

1) Characteristics of the project

2) Location of the project
3) Nature of the potential impact
SCOPE/COVERAGE OF THE EIA PROCESS
AND EIS SYSTEM/ CATEGORIES

Category A: Environmentally Critical Projects (ECPs) with

significant potential impact to cause negative environmental
impact

CATEGORY B: Projects not categorized as ECP but located in

Environmentally Critical Areas (ECAs)

CATEGORY C: Projects intended to directly enhance

environmental quality not falling under A and B

CATEGORY D: Projects unlikely to cause adverse

environmental impacts

These projects are required to obtain an ECC.

DOCUMENTARY REQUIREMENTS
1. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (EIS)
a comprehensive study of the significant impacts of a
project on the environment.
includes an Environmental Management Plan that the
proponent will fund and implement to protect the
environment.

2. INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL EXAMINATION REPORT

(IEE)
a document similar to an EIS, but with reduced details
and depth of assessment and discussion
DOCUMENTARY REQUIREMENTS
3. PROGRAMMATIC ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
(PEISS) -
a documentation of comprehensive studies on
environmental baseline conditions of a contiguous area.
includes an assessment of the carrying capacity of the area
to absorb impacts from co-located projects such as those in
industrial estates or economic zones (ecozones)

4. ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE REPORT AND

MANAGEMENT PLAN (EPRMP)
a documentation of the actual cumulative environmental
impacts and effectiveness of current measures for single
projects that are already operating but without ECCs.
DOCUMENTARY REQUIREMENTS
5. PROGRAMMATIC ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE
REPORT AND MANAGEMENT PLAN (PEPRMP)
documentation of actual cumulative environmental
impacts of co-located projects with proposals for
expansion.
describes the effectiveness of current environmental
mitigation measures and plans for performance
improvement.

NOTE: It is important to know which group a project falls

under in order to determine the appropriate
documentary requirements to submit.
 PROCEDURE FOR
ECC APPLICATION/
STAGES
 STAGE 1:SCREENING
uniform in all ECC applications regardless of the
categories
determined whether a project is covered or not thru
the EIA Coverage and Requirements Screening
Checklist (ECRSC).
The ECRSC is a self-screening tool for the Proponent to
determine coverage under the PEISS and the
corresponding requirements to comply with the
system.
 STAGE 1: SCREENING
Purpose of procedural screening:
1) completeness of information based on the scoping
agreements and recent developments in the project area
and 2) clarity of maps and figures in the EIS submitted
before being subjected to substantive review

Results of the screening shall be transmitted to the

proponent/preparer within 3 working days from receipt
of the EIS.
 STAGE 1: SCREENING
Full compliance with minimum requirements shall be
imposed before the EIA document can be reviewed
substantially.
No EIA document shall pass the Procedural Review if
critical information had not been complied with.
EIS submission shall only be received at DENR-EMB
central office or regional office concerned. In no case
shall the PENRO or CENRO be allowed or authorized to
receive EIS submissions by the regional office/s
 STAGE 2: SCOPING
Three (3) levels of scoping activity:
1. Project Briefing meeting with review team
2. Public Scoping with community
3. Technical Scoping with review team

Before going thru the three levels, social preparation or

information, education and communication of LGUs with
jurisdiction over the project area shall be done first.
 STAGE 2: SCOPING
After the information, education and communication of
LGUs, the Proponent shall request for public scoping
with the EMB by submitting five(5) sets of Pro-forma
Letters of Request for Scoping with an attached Pro-
Forma Description for Scoping. These letters must also
include a filled-out EIA Scoping/Procedural Screening
Checklist (SPSC).
Within 5 working days from receipt of the letter-
requests, the EMB shall form the prospective Review
Team which shall consist of an EMB Case Handler, 3rd
party EIARC members and/or Resource Persons
 STAGE 2: SCOPING
1st level, the Proponent shall present a project
overview, key issues, proposed terms of reference of
the EIA Study and the SPSC.
2nd level, Public Scoping, is with project stakeholders.
The community sector will raise issues which shall be
addressed in the EIA study.
3rd level, the SPSC presented by the Proponent during
Project Briefing shall be reviewed, finalized and signed
by the Review Team and the Proponent.
 STAGE 2: SCOPING
FIELD VISITS OR SITE INSPECTIONS

field work including public hearing, public

consultations, site preparations or ocular visits
 STAGE 2: SCOPING
PUBLIC HEARING
a formal process that is initiated, planned and
conducted by the EMB.
designed to promote dialogue or communication
between and among the project proponent
provides a forum for the proponent and the EMB to
understand community values or needs and
appropriately respond to them.
serves as a venue to test alternative options for
resolution of issues or conflicts.
 STAGE 2: SCOPING
PUBLIC HEARING

Criteria for the conduct of public hearing:

magnitude of the project is such that a great number of

people are affected
There is mounting public opposition against the
proposed project;
There is a written request (with valid grounds/basis)
for the conduct of such hearing from any of the
stakeholders.
 STAGE 2: SCOPING
PUBLIC HEARING
public hearing is NOT the appropriate venue to ensure
that the findings of the EIA study had been
communicated to the stakeholders.
The processes, methods and proofs of the FEEDBACK
TO THE STAKEHOLDERS should be documented in the
Process Document.
primary aim of communicating the EIA results to the
stakeholders IS NOT A SUFFICIENT BASIS to require a
public hearing.
 STAGE 2: SCOPING
CONDUCT OF PUBLIC HEARING

The EMB shall conduct public hearing with the

assistance of the proponent and preparer..
ALL public hearings shall be SUMMARY in nature and
shall not strictly adhere to the technical rules of
evidence.
Public hearings shall b e OPEN to ALL interested groups
with valid concerns about the proposed project.
STAGE 2: SCOPING
WHEN PUBLIC HEARING BECOMES MANDATORY:

When submission on proofs of social acceptability are

lacking or inadequate, public hearing becomes
mandatory.
If no public hearing is held despite such lack or
inadequacy of proof of such social acceptability, the
EIARC must strongly justify why no public hearing was
required.
 STAGE 3. EIA STUDY AND
REPORT PREPARATION
the Proponent shall undertake an EIA Study with the
assistance of its EIA Preparer Team
wholly within the control of the proponent.
The DENR-EMB is not allowed to take part in the EIA
Study or in the preparation of the report.
 STAGE 4 SUBSTANTIVE
REVIEW
The review of EMB shall be guided by 3 general criteria:
1) that environmental considerations are integrated
into the overall project planning
2) the assessment is technically sound and proposed
environmental mitigation measures are effective,
3) social acceptability is based on informed public
participation and effective regulatory review of the
EIS depends largely on timely, full and accurate
disclosure of relevant information by project
proponents and other stakeholders in the review
process
 CRITERIA FOR REVIEW
1. CLARITY
the EIS document is intended to communicate the
results of the EIA to a wide range of stakeholders
including the EIARC, regulators, decision makers,
affected communities and the general public.
clearly describes the methods and approach employed
in the EIA process, especially the social preparation
process, which is aimed to ensure timely and informed
stakeholder participation.
 CRITERIA FOR REVIEW
2. BALANCE
balanced if it is devoid of bias in the presentation and
analysis of data.
provide justifications for pre-conceived conclusions in
favor of any interest group.
demonstrate a balanced treatment of descriptive and
analytical discussion
present the key issues/concerns of the stakeholders
and the proponents corresponding response or actions
to address these.
 CRITERIA FOR REVIEW
3. ACCURACY and PRECISION
All analytical data presented in the EIS should satisfy
the prescribed levels of accuracy and precision as
derived from established statistical tools and methods.
All the baseline characterization methods (such as
sampling, survey and testing procedures) as well as
impact prediction tools and techniques (such as
modeling techniques, field tests and laboratory
requirements) used in the EIA study should be able to
pass scrutiny not only for statistical, but also for
scientific soundness.
 CRITERIA FOR REVIEW
4. CONSISTENCY
> the EIS document should be consistent in terms of
data/information presented, findings and
recommendations.

5. RESPONSIVENESS
> the EIS should be responsive to the issues and
concerns raised by the stakeholders.
EIARC may employ:
1. public hearing or public consultation
2. Site visits or ocular inspections
3. Technical studies or special researches to be
undertaken by research institutions or academe
4. Other methods may be employed depending on the
magnitude and complexity of the project
STAGE 5 DECISION MAKING
Within 5 days from receipt of EIARC Report,
the EMB Case handler shall prepare and submit the Review
Process Report (RPR) /Recommendation Document to the
EIAMD Review Section or EIAM Division Chief.
the EMB Chief or EMB Director will endorse the
recommendation
issue the CASE DECISION DOCUMENT which can either be
an ECC or a Letter of Denial.
 APPROVING AUTHORITY OF ECC
APPLICATIONS (ECPROJECTS)
DENR Secretary/EMB Director (40 working days)
- co-located applying for Programmatic ECC
- mining projects
- forestry projects
- other types

EMB Regional Director ( 20 working days)

- EIS or PEDRMP-based
- IEE or EPRMP-based

The period begins once the application documents and

the payment of the required processing and review fees
are received by EMB.
 STAGE 6 MONITORING, VALIDATION
AND EVALUATION/AUDIT
not part of the issuing process of the ECC
forms part of the stages of the EIA process and is applicable
to all types of ECC applications because:
a. Project compliance with the conditions set in the
ECC
b. Project compliance with the Environmental
Management Plan (EMP)
c. Effectiveness of environmental measures on
prevention or mitigation of actual project impacts
vis-a-vis the predicted impacts used as basis for the
EMP design and
d. Continual updating of the EMP for sustained responsiveness
to project operations and project impacts.
 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF
MONITORING
Proponents issued ECCs are primarily responsible for
monitoring their projects.
Multi-partite Monitoring Teams (MMTs) are organized
to encourage public participation, to promote greater
stakeholder vigilance and to provide appropriate check
and balance mechanisms in the monitoring of project
implementation.
MMTs have the primary responsibility of VALIDATION
of proponents environmental performance.
The EMB shall be primarily responsible for the over-all
evaluation/audit of the proponents monitoring and
the MMT validation.
 EMF and EGF
The Environmental Monitoring Fund (EMF) is a fund
that a proponent establishes in support of the activities
of the MMT.

The Environmental Guarantee Fund (EGF) is required

to be established for all co-located or single projects
that have been determined by DENR to pose a
significant public risk or where the project requires
rehabilitation or restoration.
 ECC Amendments
The request is MAJOR if it involves:
1. Expansion of land/project area
2. Increase in production capacity
3. Major changes in process flow or technology to be used

Take note that ECC is a project and location-specific

document. Any change in project location will necessitate
a new application. Major changes in process flow or
technology may drastically affect the validity of the EIA
findings. In such event, EMB shall require a new
application.
 MINOR AMENDMENTS
1. Typographical error
2. Extension of deadlines for submission of post ECC
requirements
3. Extension of ECC validity
4. Change in company name or ownership
5. Decrease in land/project area or production capacity
 MONITORING OF CNCS
Projects issued Certificate of Non-Coverage (CNC) are
not subject to monitoring under the EIS System.
Environmental monitoring of these projects shall be
under the purview of any or all of the ff entities:
1. EMB Pollution Control Division
2. Lead Government Agency
3. other Government Agencies
4. LGUs
 APPEAL PROCEDURES
An appeal can be made for any of the ff decisions:
1. Issuance or non-issuance of the ECC
2. Ask for penalty reduction
3. Reconsideration of the order to cease and desist
operation
WHO MAY APPEAL
The proponent or any stakeholder, including but not limited
to, the LGUs concerned and affected communities.

Level of Appeals
Any party aggrieved by the decision of the approving/issuing
authority may appeal to the next administrative level. For such
purpose, the level of appeal are as follows:
 LEVEL OF APPEALS
An appeal on the decisions of the Division Chief shall be
submitted to the Regional Director.
An appeal on the decisions of the Regional Director
shall be submitted to the DENR-EMB Director.
An appeal on the decisions of the EIA Division Chief
(DENR-EMB Central Office) shall be submitted to the
DENR-EMB Director.
An appeal on the decisions of the DENR-EMB Director
shall be submitted to the DENR Secretary. In any case,
the decision of the Secretary shall be immediately
executory.
 GROUNDS FOR APPEAL
GRAVE ABUSE OF DISCRETION and SERIOUS ERRORS
IN THE FINDINGS OF FACT, which would cause grave or
irreparable injury to the aggrieved party.
 CLASSES OF VIOLATIONS
1) Projects with or without ECCs which pose grave
and/or irreparable danger to environment, life and
property

2) Projects are established and/or operating without an

ECC

Operating without an ECC refers to all projects that were

implemented without ECC but should have secured one as
provided for by PD 1586\

Operating with an ECC secured from agencies or entities

other than DENR is also considered operating without an
ECC
 CLASSES OF VIOLATIONS
3) Violations of conditions of ECCs with old format
referring to submission of documents, conduct of studies
and other conditions within the mandate of other
agencies.
4) Projects violating ECC conditions and EMP
Commitments and other procedural requirements of the
PEISS.

Violations in relation to ECC conditions are classified as

MINOR and MAJOR offenses, differentiated by schedule of
fines based on seriousness and gravity of the offense.
 AUTHORITY TO ISSUE
CEASE AND DESIST ORDER (CDO)
The EMB Director or the EMB-RD may issue a CDO
based on violations under the PEISS which cannot be
attributed to specific environmental laws
SUSPENSION OR CANCELLATION OF
ECC
ECCs may be suspended and or a fine not > 50T for
violation of proponents to comply with ECC conditions.